Judge Slashes Wyeth Damages in Hormone Suit

By Sarah Rubenstein

Wyeth’s been through the wringer over damages in a Nevada lawsuit it lost over its hormone-therapy treatments. But the legal squeeze eased up just a tad after a Reno judge cut the damage award to $58 million, less than half of the initial amount.

The suit is one of some 5,300 cases involving hormone replacements, including Premarin and Prempro, filed against Wyeth on behalf of 7,900 plaintiffs, according to the company. But it’s a doozy.

Here’s the play-by-play. On Oct. 10, the jury awarded $134.5 million in compensatory damages to three women who claimed Wyeth’s hormone-therapy drugs caused their breast cancer. Two days later, the jury slashed the tab to $35 million after Washoe District Judge Robert Perry instructed it to reconsider. Turned out the jury had also included punitive damages in the original compensatory figure.

But before Wyeth could wipe the sweat from its brow, the jury deliberated for a third time, on Oct. 15. This time they awarded an additional $99 million in punitive damages — bringing the bill back up to about what it had been in the first place. Wyeth filed motions for “post-trial relief,” as the company described it in a public filing, and that brings us to today.

Re-enter Judge Perry. He’s now ordered the award be reduced to a total of $58 million — $23 million in compensatory damages and $35 million in punitive damages. The jury’s original awards suggested “they were the result of passion and prejudice,” the judge wrote. The reduction in damages “adequately compensates Plaintiffs for the serious consequences which the jury found to have been caused by Defendant, while also serving to punish Defendant and deter others from similar conduct.”

Still, Wyeth isn’t exactly thrilled. “While it’s encouraging the District Court has acknowledged the excessiveness of the award to some extent, it doesn’t change the fact that the verdict was irreparably flawed and fraught with error,” company spokesman Doug Petkus tells the Health Blog. Wyeth is appealing to the Nevada Supreme Court.

“Experienced observers don’t make that much of the headline-grabbing verdicts, because we know that what plaintiffs end up collecting is often quite a bit less,” Fordham Law School professor Howard Erichson tells us. And in this case, there was a “confused jury,” Erichson says, making such a decision by the judge even more likely. Even so, the reduced award is “still a lot of money,” he says.

How did the three women feel about the change, the Health Blog asks their lawyer? “You’re not going to hear plaintiffs or their lawyers complaining about a $58 million outcome,” Peter Wetherall, a partner at White Meany & Wetherall LLP, a Nevada firm representing them, tells us.

Comments (5 of 8)

Ok, first if you have never been a women in menopause your comments DON'T count. My mom and aunt were both on HRT and both had cancer. I chose the bioidentical route and now Wyeth is trying to shut that down. Funny cuz the bioidenticals have never seen a court room. Hmmmmm maybe that is because horse urine DOESN'T BELONG IN A HUMANE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

5:01 pm February 25, 2008

Alexis wrote :

It is well documented that hormone drugs may increase a woman’s risk of cancer, heart disease and other serious conditions. But still, many women remain uninformed about the nature of these drugs. For example, most women, and even health care professionals, don’t know that hormone drugs like Premarin and Prempro are made from the urine of pregnant horses. Thousands of horses are forced to stand in very narrow stalls that restrict their movement, strapped to collection devices, for months on end. Each mare produces a foal every year, adding thousands of foals to an already oversaturated horse market. As a result, many of the foals, and the mares who are too old to be productive, are at risk of being slaughtered their meat for human consumption in Europe and Asia. Many women who have learned of the horses’ suffering have sought alternative ways to relieve menopausal symptoms. In the case of hormone drugs, compassion for animals may also be good for our own health. People interested in learning more about the issue can visit http://www.pmurescue.org.

8:25 pm February 21, 2008

HM wrote :

Women who take HRT need to be properly educated about the possible side effects; it's not Wyeth's fault that they had breast cancer. Becuase these women didn't want to have hot flashes they risked their health by taking HRT. Your hormones decrease significantly as you age becuase they are more prone to mutating and becoming cancerous... that's why you DO NOT take HRT which induce cellular growth!!! Patients need to ask more questions...

1:40 pm February 21, 2008

Bob, ex R&D wrote :

Well, what do we do, stop making HRT? It does a lot of good for a lot of women. A very small percentage suffer these negative effects. Nothing in life is guaranteed. You can walk outside and get hit by a bolt of lightening, or your airbag didn't protect your during a collision. Do you sue? We have a protection agency called the FDA which reviews and either approves or rejects new drugs for our use.
Why not sue them? If the pharmaceutical company is found to be remiss, or hiding of negative effects, then they are guilty. Everytime we go anywhere, eat anything, or do anything, there are risks involved. Yes, cancer is horrible, but the unanswered question is 'why did only a few react this way'? Did they have a predisposing factor or were they exposed to a common contaminant? Why not sue the doctor? He or she prescribed the medicine. The answer: They are not a big conglomerate with a lot of money. Wouldn't be worth the time and money to sue. On the other hand, the cost of these lawsuits, as well as the research, manufacturind and administrative costs have to be reflected in the ultimate costs of the drug.